take your answer off the air...

Talker's MagazineThe quirky talk radio trade mag. Check the Talk Radio Research Project- it's not very scientific, but places on the top 15 talkers list (scroll down to Talk Radio Audiences By Size)) are as hotly contested as Emmys (and mean just about as much).

The AdvocateNo, not THAT Advocate... it's the Northwest Progressive Institute's Official Blog.

Media MattersDocumentation of right-wing media in video, audio and text.

Orcinushome of David Neiwert, freelance investigative journalist and author who writes extensively about far-right hate groups

Hominid Views"People, politics, science, and whatnot"
Darryl is a statistician who fights imperialism with empiricism, gives good links and wry commentary.

Jesus' General An 11 on the Manly Scale of Absolute Gender, a 12 on the Heavenly Scale of the 10 Commandments and a 6 on the earthly scale of the Immaculately Groomed.

Irrational Public Radio "informs, challenges, soothes and/or berates, and does so with a pleasing vocal cadence and unmatched enunciation. When you listen to IPR, integrity washes over you like lava, with the pleasing familiarity of a medium-roast coffee and a sensible muffin."

The Moderate VoiceThe voice of reason in the age of Obama, and the politics of the far-middle.

News Hounds Dogged dogging of Fox News by a team who seems to watch every minute of the cable channel so you don't have to.

HistoryLinkFun to read and free encyclopedia of Washington State history. Founded by the late Walt Crowley, it's an indispensable tool and entertainment source for history wonks and surfers alike.

right-wing blogs we like

The Reagan WingHearin lies the real heart of Washington State Republicans. Doug Parris runs this red-meat social conservative group site which bars no holds when it comes to saying who they are and who they're not; what they believe and what they don't; who their friends are and where the rest of the Republicans can go. Well-written, and flaming.

April 20, 2010

Ed schultz: 90% of e-media is controlled by the right

"[Tea Party baggers are] low-information voters who are being propped up by
the Glenn Becks of the world and told to go out and protest and they
really don’t know what to be angry about."~~ Ed Schultz

MSNBC and radio talk host Ed Schultz sat on a panel at Al
Sharpton's Annual
National Action Network with Liz Benjamin and
Jonathan Capehart to discuss whether people of color are
covered fairly in the media.

"We have to be very cognizant of the fact that 90 percent of the electronic media in this country is owned, operated, programmed and controlled by conservatives," he said. "They made a concerted effort during and before the Reagan years that they were going to get the microphone. Whether you're in favor of or against or understand the fairness doctrine, it's neither here nor there...the fact is we have conservatives on the air electioneering.

There are approximately 450 conservative talk show hosts in this country and there are about 60 progressives, only a handful are syndicated nationally. And I assure you, if I owned 600 radio stations, Rush Limbaugh wouldn’t be on any of them. Ownership is an issue: you gotta own the signal, you gotta have access to the microphone, and if you don’t do that you no longer can make an influence of those who are listening."

Comments

Yet the stations that allow the likes of Ed Schultz to spew their vile crap just seem to come and go. There just aren't enough people in this nation stupid enough to listen to liberal blab radio.
But keep going to the racist events and continue to conspire on how to keep the black family down and under democrat control.

Ed Schultz just isn't very bright. There was no conspiracy to keep Air America's listenership down. Neilson doesn't misreport MSNBC's ratings. The irrefutable profitability of many conservative entertainers across radio and television is a function of ratings and free enterprise.

The real reasons for the disparities between liberal and conservative media is rooted in the psychology of their respective audiences. But Ed Schultz will never get that because he doesn't have much intellectual horsepower. His show is just painful.

My first ever though of Ed Schultz was "wow a liberal hick, who knew?" ... and that's my most current thought of him... right up to the present.

When you don't like the message, shoot the messenger. You should know better, Andrew. That's so rightwing.

The increase in conservative think tanks and the money behind them are part of the equation. Along with the monopoly right-wing radio has on large regions of the country. Do your homework and quit relying on that right-wing meme, Andrew.

Ed's sponsorship to the national level by the Democratic party bothers me. He's a hack as well. But in this age, I must say, at least he is a liberal hack. Very rare, beautiful plumage(mp), but can still stink up the place. He makes me a bit sympathetic to the teabaggers. As a liberal, I don't like being associated with him any more than Ron Paul TeaPartiers like being associated with the Koch funded TeaBaggers.

joanie you're not making any sense. Ed Schults isn't making any sense. If 90% of all electronic media was owned and maipulated by conservatives then why don't we see a lot of religious programming on the major networks? Why don't we hear more Christian alt-rock stations?

Everything suggest that conservative radio and FOX NEWS enjoy high ratings simply because people want to listen, and want to watch. That doesn't mean their ideology is valid, it still isn't. Conservate ideology can't produce a sustainable economic model. They just play on people's emotions; their racism, their financial fears, their xenophobia, etc. That's why it makes for good entertainment. Beck and Hannity can say anything they want. They don't need facts. It's because people like Rachel Maddow have to quote wonkish facts that their shows seem so bland and tedious by comparison. Even Keith Olbermann is at his best when he's declaring a "worst person in the world" or having an emotional breakdown on camera.

There's no evidence that Rupert Murdoch pushes conservative views on FOX NEWS for any reason other than to rake in lots of cash - and he's suceeding at that.

Ed Schuiltz is just making excuses for being a minor player in every league of media he has partaken. He's pushing 60 and running out of scape goats, and now he's talking about running for office in North Dakota. Run Ed! Run from your problems!

Dori: I can't. I can't stand watching or listening to him. I don't waste a lot of time cataloguing things about people that don't interest me. I can tell you that my distaste for him started during the 2008 primaries. Probably has something to do with the way demonizes people he disagrees with; whether on the right or left.

Actually, that's kind of funny. I wasn't liberal enough for Air America, and I'm not right wing enough for Premier radio (no loss there). Being moderate just doesn't pay. It only affords peace of mind.

Christian programming? Not all right-wing radio belongs to Christians. Is Rush correlated to Christian programming? If so, your source please. That's not something I've noticed.

Fixed News gets about a million to two million more watchers than MSNBC. And I'm being generous there. If you combine MSNBC and CNN, what are the numbers? I don't know. But I know that your statement suggesting that Fixed News is a big player in any market has to be proved to me before I buy it. And if it is the only player in the market, what do you think the will numbers look like?

I could care less if you like Ed Schultz. But your whole screed was a personal attack on him. He provides a service. He talks to middle America. He listens to them. He's got a lot a common sense. When a rightwinger argues, he listens, tries to convince and then agrees to disagree. He's not shrill, nor emotional, nor dumb. He knows his facts. And he presents them very well.

Maybe you don't like the "hick" from North Dakota. Maybe you, like me, judged him on his 'bubba" image which I did before I started to really listen. Oh, that's easy and oh, so comfortable, for us sophisticated urban liberals. But I gave the guy a chance and I ended up respecting him.

Yes, I personally attack Beck and Hannity because they lie. They absolutely lie. Schultz never lies. He's actually more accurate than Randi. He waves the flag. He promotes products made in America.

You sound like an elitist liberal who is too good to wave the flag. Personally, I hate flag waving. But, it is in his heart. And I absolutely respect his idea of getting back to manufacturing in America. I absolutely respect that he takes on Congress and says it to their faces. I absolutely respect that he's for the little guy. You're just too good for Ed and me.

I like Ed. And I listen to him. So do a lot of other people. We don't all need funny, lying people to be entertained. Some of us actually like to think. Even us city Daisy Maes and Abners like common sense political talk. Without the ego of Rush, Hannity, and Rhodes.

As for being "a minor player?" He's got a cable show and a radio show. Only in your frame (I'm too good for this hick) would that be considered "minor." He's gets a whole lot more exposure than Northwest Progressive. Yeah, I think he's a player. I would grant that anybody heard nationally is a player To me, that characterization reflects on your need for recognition than his. On it's face, it is a stupid comment.

Lucas, you are entitled to your opinion. If you can't stand him, fine. How is that relevant to his comments? Can you talk about the predominance of right-wing media? Or is it just easier to trash him?

BTW, I've never heard a demonizing word from him after a phone call. No one has more patience with opposing views than Ed. I don't think you or Andrew listen to him. I really don't. I'm saying that as someone who does. He rarely gets antagonistic unless someone gives him attitude or dishonest rhetoric. He doesn't spend time on either.

Finally, I love this mantle of "centrist." What is a "centrist" anyway? I'd love a response to that. What do you believe that makes you a centrist? And is being a "centrist" a good thing? Eisenhower and Nixon would be considered liberals today. So, you're right of Eisenhower and Nixon?

joanie, I wants facts proving there was a corperate conspiracy to misrepresent Air America's ratings. Word on the street is CNN's ratings have fallen by 50% in 2010. Is that a hoax? It's possible, just not... probable.

I applaud Ed Schultz for being direct with Nancy Pelosi, the problem is, he was wrong. He was overreacting and being irrational and not paying respect to the dirty deal making, the "centrism" you might call it, that's necessary to win needed cooperation. And she was vindicated. Just try to imagine how hilariously fucked the Democratic majority would be right now if the likes of Ed Schultz were House leader.

He represents the emotional element of the progressive side, he represents people like you. Loud idealists.

I applaud Ed Schultz for being direct with Nancy Pelosi, the problem is, he was wrong. He was overreacting and being irrational and not paying respect to the dirty deal making, the "centrism" you might call it, that's necessary to win needed cooperation.

Wrong about what? How irrational? Pelosi gave in - barely - on the promise that things would change and the House would get respect. That's called "cooperation?" You think she'll get it?

So far, you've given me YOUR opinion. Nothing more.

And I don't recall anything about Ed becoming House Leader or even a senator. He's been asked. Period. Don't you think YOU"RE being a little emotional, irrational and even sensationalist?

Frank Shiers is a guy who I imagine walks around in high pants like that Fire Marshall Bill character that Jim Carrie played on In Living Color. The obnoxiously smug ass was on his show last noight talking about Yakoma and he stated that there are neighborhoods in Yakima that aer so full of criminal illegal Mexicans that they are just police "no go" zones where the police "just don't ever go , just like East L.A." I'm flat out calling bullshit on that ,Frank. I think you totally made that up. I don't believe it whatsoever. Are there any Yakima types who know whether this is true or false? I'm pretty much convinced it's just Frank talking out of his ass again.

Conservative commentators may be cackling about the failure of Air America radio, trying to make it into an indicator for both the inherent weakness of liberal-leaning radio and liberal politics. But any reasoned analysis of the radio industry demonstrates that neither is the case. Rush Limbaugh, in particular, and the rest of the nation’s most popular conservative hosts owe much of their success to first-mover advantages taken before and after the Telecom Act of 1996 completely changed the business of radio. The fact that they are politically conservative is less important than the cleverness, deviousness and luck of the companies that made it happen.

Fundamentally, Air America was a mediocre idea, poorly executed. Make that, disasterously executed. As former Crossfire co-host and current talk radio host Bill Press notes, Air America was insufficiently funded from the very beginning and

Even before its launch, it was taken over by a con artist who was later convicted on un-related charges of business fraud. Managers spent money lavishly on talent and studios, while generating little advertising income….
Except for Jon Sinton, few of their executives had ever worked in talk radio. In many ways, it was amateur hour from the beginning.

Putting aside even that inauspicious start, any new radio network started in 2004 would have faced an uphill battle, regardless of its political leanings. Simply put, timing was not on Air America’s side.

By comparison, let’s examine Premiere Radio Networks, which is the largest radio syndicate in the country. And while not explicitly conservative in the same way that Air America espoused itself as liberal, Premiere is home to the nation’s most highly-rated conservative hosts, including Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glen Beck (along with liberal Randi Rhodes). There are many commentators who would argue that the success of Premiere and its roster of talent springs primarily from the sheer popularity of conservative views, especially on AM talk radio.
That may be how it looks today, but let’s turn back the clock to a time before AM talk equaled all-conservative, all the time. 1988 was the year when Rush Limbaugh’s program first went national with the support of former ABC Radio executive Edward McLaughlin’s newly founded EFM Media Management. While the radio business was stable, at the time AM radio was having a tougher go of it, relative to FM, which offered higher fidelity for music, the mainstay of radio programming for the last quarter century.

It’s a simple fact that Limbaugh’s program grew quickly, reaching a nationwide listenership of two million in 1990. But the question that doesn’t get asked so often is, how did he get there?

Bill Mann, a former contributor to Inside Radio, reminded us just last year:

Here’s how a barter deal works: To launch the show, Limbaugh’s syndicator, Premiere Radio Networks [then EFM] — the same folks who syndicate wingnut du jour Glen Beck — gave Limbaugh’s three hours away — that’s right, no cash — to local radio stations, mostly in medium and smaller markets, back in the early 1990’s.

So, a local talk station got Rush’s show for zilch. In exchange, Premiere took for itself much of the local station’s available advertising time (roughly 15 minutes an hour) and packed the show with national ads it had already pre-sold.

So, imagine you’re a small operator of a local AM radio station in 1990. This is before the Telecom Act of 1996, so, in essence, most radio station owners are small. Also, this is before automation equipment was inexpensive enough to be cheaper than a DJ or operator’s hourly wage.

During drive time you might be doing pretty well with some local news and talk programming, supplemented with call-ins and network features. But during the midday, it’s a little rough. You could just play music, but nobody really listens to music on AM anymore. You’d like to have some entertaining talk programming, but talent costs money, and the ad revenue isn’t there yet. You could pick up some syndicated programming that might be cheaper than good local talent, but that, too, costs money up front that you’re not sure you have.

Then, along comes EFM or Premiere with a great deal for you. You get three hours of a popular talk program out of New York City from an established station with a nationwide reputation. And it won’t cost you one red cent. In exchange you just have to give up some of your (nearly nonexistent) ad inventory. What would you do?

I’m not sure who first said it, but it’s hard to deny: it’s hard to compete with free. In 2010 good ol’ Rushbo’s show isn’t quite so free anymore, but that’s only after building up a pretty good 21-year track record.

But the story doesn’t end there. In 1997 Jacor communications, then an owner of 66 radio stations, bought EFM. 20 of Jacor stations were AM stations in major markets. And guess what show they’d soon be airing if they weren’t already? Yes, the Rush Limbaugh Show. Though not a significant boost to Rush’s overall listenership, the deal foreshadowed the growing relationship between owning stations and owning content.

The benefit of this arrangement wasn’t lost on the new #1 in radio ownership, Clear Channel, which bought Jacor just a year later and merged syndication operations into Premiere. At that time Clear Channel only had 625 stations, but would go on to own over 1200 at its peak. While Limbaugh didn’t necessarily need the boost of these extra stations–he was already heard in almost every market in the country–the deal certainly opened up opportunities for future Premiere hosts like Hannity and Beck.

Now, lets look back at Air America, which started 16 years into Limbaugh’s reign, and six years after the full merger of Jacor, Premiere and EFM into Clear Channel. How do you compete with the nation’s largest radio station owner and syndicator? That’s like asking, how do you compete with Microsoft Windows? Sure, Apple’s been a good competitor for Windows, but it’s success relies heavily on products like iPods and iPhones. And how many other significant desktop operating system competitors are there?

Sure, maybe Air America could have tried the same strategy that EFM did with Limbaugh and give away their programming. The trick worked the first time around, and maybe there were enough stations out there ready to take the deal. But you can’t just wish 2004 into being 1988. EFM and Limbaugh had the distinct advantage of not having to make deals with companies like Clear Channel, Cumulus or Entercom. They built that business from the grassroots on a mixture of cleverness, conniving, business savvy and Limbaugh’s talent as a radio entertainer, taking advantage of weakness in the AM radio marketplace. To trot out another tired cliche: lightning doesn’t strike twice.

Air America’s chances of success as a new nationwide radio network weren’t good from the start, whether it was liberal, conservative, centrist, fascist or socialist. For all intents and purposes, today’s other top conservative talkers started out with access to several hundred AM stations owned by their syndicator’s parent company right out of the gate. Air America had to start from scratch, owning a total of zero stations, with each deal with each station costing time and money.

At the same time, there’s arguably more nationally syndicated liberal-leaning talk on commercial radio than there was in 2004. In part this is because Air America lost hosts like Randi Rhodes, and never cornered the market on liberal talk in the first place. Many stations that were Air America affiliates ended up building a roster of liberal talk programming alongside AA’s offerings. Chicago’s “Progressive Talk” WCPT tells its listeners:

WCPT AM&FM is not Air America and we are not going away. Although Air America became a generic term for the “ Progressive Talk” format, we are a locally-owned radio station that is committed to a voice that speaks about issues which are vital to Americans as well as balancing the Chicago radio dial. …

Programs such as Bill Press, Stephanie Miller, Ed Schultz and Thom Hartmann come from other sources. That’s why virtually all of our current programming will continue to be heard….

Air America’s failure is nothing more than the failure of one radio experiment, nothing more and nothing less. Commercial broadcast radio has been a tough business since the likes of Clear Channel squeeze the life out of it beginning in 1996. The kind of success Air America was hoping for required ownership, and they were eight years too late for that.

A history of radio, Andrew. Just for you.

Now, Ed never said "conspiracy." But, he did say "concerted effort." I would proffer that the above shows a "concerted effort" to get conservative radio on the air to the degree that they were offering it for free.

Words mean something. You need to read carefully and respond carefully. His point is that conservatives control the message. Is that true or not? That would make a much more interesting discussion than trashing a man for making a statement that is provably true. Or are you claiming that these major corporations including the Australian and Ailes are liberals.

Also, you might be interested in a treatise on think tanks in both the US and Canada which would give an even more interesting though complex analysis of their purposes and influences. It is especially enlightening in it's analysis of conservative think tanks which are much newer on the political scene than liberal ones. And they were created for a reason. Do you have the patience and mental muscle to read it? You don't have to agree with it. It would be nice if you simply sounded less simplistic when you posted. Conservative Think Tanks in the United States and Canada
Martin Thunert

Of course, simplistic thinking is easier. Which is probably why it tends to predominate on the right.

Ed's show has become a giant commercial. He interviews his sponsors everyday. That way the pay more for advertising and get included on Ed's podcast that people have to pay for. Ed is all about making money and rubbing elbows with big name politicians. Radio is irrelevant and dying, the "Fairness Doctrine" talk is Ed trying to get on more stations with bigger signals to make more money and feed his massive ego.

All of that would be a moot point if people had listened to Air America. This sounds like a lot of excuses piled on top of more excuses. You can talk about how it was poorly marketed and mismanaged, but what of word of mouth? If people had actually listened, all the mismanagement in the world wouldn't have been able to bring it down. The numbers were never there. You can't deny that.

The analysis did not target simple mismanagement. There's little point in presenting anything factual if you're going to parse it and ignore the substance. But then, in the larger scheme of things, your opinion like mine is fairly meaningless. Except to people who, like you, wish to trash a man who has made his mark in political radio talk. I choose to chalk that up to envy.

You don't have to like him. But it would be more honest to recognize achievement.

And duffman, nobody made you blog monitor. So go back to your precious hole and make love to your smiley faces.

Andrew, I think part of it was how AAR was distributed to local stations. The local guys could choose to insert local talkers or not, they could rearrage the schedule as they wished, and it's hard to build an audience when the local affiliate does a crappy job of advertising its product. KPOJ still has a smoother sounding station than KPTK..the early days of 1090 were painful to listen to. Green 960 has even a better product, with almost no commercials and the ones they have are pretty quiet. If the other affiliates could have operated like KPOJ and Green 960, the product might have sold better. The other thing the affiliates do that turns people away is to carry college sports. Do people who tune in to hear political talk on the radio really want to hear WSU basketball?

Your comment about "word of mouth" got me thinking. Among my extremely liberal friends, only a handful listen to KPOJ or KPTK. Some had never heard of it. Not only are they glued to NPR, but it exemplifies how poorly the AAR stations were sold to listeners. I tried the "word of mouth" thing, but they were happy with what they were listening to now.

Anyway, the fact that the "mothership" no longer exists doesn't really matter anymore. The shows it introduced are still very popular with their loyal listeners.

Joanie is right--the careers of Ed and Rachel and Al have skyrocketed because of their work on radio. The rest of us write on blogs.

KVI am 570 KHz Visit the burnt-out husk of one of the seminal right-wing talkers in all the land. Here's where once trilled the reactionary tones of Rush Limbaugh, John Carlson, Kirby Wilbur, Mike Siegel, Peter Weissbach, Floyd Brown, Dinky Donkey, and Bryan Suits.
Now it's Top 40 hits from the '60's & '70's aimed at that diminishing crowd who still remembers them and can still hear.

KTTH am 770 KHzRight wing home of local, and a whole bunch of syndicated righties such as Glennn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Medved, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Lars Larsony, and for an hour a day: live & local David Boze.